| > 1. Introversion There is an implicit assumption in his definition of an introvert that is introvert == cut off from society. This is just plain wrong. An introvert is a a shy, reticent person and this does not imply that he is cut off from society or does not understand social interactions. I would argue that it's the exact opposite. Introverts understand social relationships and the "real world" very, very well. They just don't actively take part in social interactions much. > The first is the idea that measurement of things like quality and success can be objective, perfect and fair. These are not objective facts, they are highly contextual and can be manipulated by power struggles, charisma, clever marketing, or outright fraud. The article is concerned with startups with a very small team working on it. Measurement is easier than in large teams of people. I don't see OP disputing this directly. The question of power struggles, charisma etc does not arise in startups with a small team. > A second critical assumption being posited in Graham’s essay is that one person’s direct contribution can be disentangled from that of others. No, it's easier to have a better idea of what people in a small team contribute than in a large team. > Although he never says this payoff is guaranteed, he doesn’t deny it either First valid criticism. > Here is the crux of Graham’s assumption that programmers are the real engine of the value chain. He ignores the fact that without the infrastructure and ancillary components of the business, it isn’t so easy to simply translate that new piece of software into pure profit. That's exactly what small startups do, where the founders manage everything from code to sales to legal work (in the initial stages of a startup). > Graham so desperately wants to justify his own wealth as the righteous product of his own personal labor without acknowledging the effects of either luck or power Uncalled for personal attack, but yes, luck plays a major role. > “Smallness = Measurement”. Here, he uses the analogy of the “ten best rowers” who, if you take them out of a large system and put them together with a shared goal, will necessarily be superior. In comparison to large teams, measurement is easier in small teams. Team dynamics are still important, whether the team is small or large. > It is amazing how well this piece serves as marketing fodder for Graham’s venture capital arm, Y Combinator. Looking at it from a cynical perspective, yes. Nothing stops people from questioning or rejecting (or dismissing) his work publicly as lots of people on HN and twitter do. > Libertarianism != Meritocracy This section has some valid criticisms of libertarianism and PG's implicit bias towards it. |